Can you imagine four hours of your day getting to and from work? For the last eight years, Jo Meade rode her bike each Sunday on a 16-mile round trip to her job washing dishes. It took more than an hour each way. Other days of the week she would spend two hours on three buses from her apartment to get to the other work, for a four-hour round trip.

    That was the “before” part of her life. The “after” part of her life was started by the community Police Officer Trevor Arnold, who delivered a used car to her with the help of a car dealer and other donors.

    Arnold, who spotted Meade, red and sweaty, riding her bike in the worst heat this summer, decided he would het her a car. He intended to quietly buy her a used car out of his own pocket so he turned to his friend Kody Slaght, a car salesman to ask about a car priced $1,000. That wasn't enough for a reliable ride, Slaght said, but the dealership said they would find a good car for her at a good price. Soon others were donating. Slaght and Arnold wouldn't say how much the car cost, but the value is about $4,000.

    Arnold said he was motivated by Meade's work ethic（职业道德）to help. “I see a lot of hardworking people nut that's when they are at work. Can you imagine spending four hours of your day getting to and from work?” he said.

    Meade's boss said she was awesome and really reliable when she worked and she got along with others. “She's willing to rise the three buses to get in here on her day off if we need her too.”

    Meade said she was planning to buy a car, “but I haven't been able to afford it,” she said. “Trevor, he is a very good guy. I did not expect this.”

    Technology offers conveniences such as opening the garage door from your car or changing the television station without touching the TV.

    Now one American company is offering its employees a new convenience: a microchip implanted (植入) in their hands. Employees who have these chips can do all kinds of things just by waving their hands. Three Square Market is offering to implant microchips in all of their employees for free. Each chip costs $300 and Three Square Market will pay for the chip. Employees can volunteer to have the chips implanted in their hands. About 50 out of 80 employees have chosen to do so. The president of the company, his wife and their children are also getting chips implanted in their hands.

    The chip is about the size of a grain of rice. Implanting the chip only takes about a second and is said to hurt only very briefly. The chips go under the skin between the thumb and forefinger. With a chip in the hand, a person can enter the office building, buy food, sign into computers and more, simply by waving that hand near a scanner. The chips will be also used to identify employees. Employees who want convenience, but do not want to have a microchip implanted under their skin, can wear a wristband (腕带) or a ring with a chip instead. They can perform the same tasks with a wave of their hands as if they had an implanted chip.

    Three Square Market is the first company in the United States to offer to implant chips in its employees. Epicenter, a company in Sweden, has been implanting chips in its employees for a while.

    Three Square Market says the chip cannot track the employees. The company says scanners can read the chips only when they are within a few inches of them. “The chips protect against identity theft, similar, to credit cards.” The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the chips back in 2004, so they should be safe for humans, according to the company.

    In the future, people with the chips may be able to do more with them, even outside the office. Todd Westby is Chief Executive Officer of Three Square Market. He says, “Eventually, this technology will become standardized allowing you to use this as your passport, public transit, all purchasing opportunities, etc.”

    Why do some people live to be older than others? You know the standard explanations: keeping a moderate diet, engaging in regular exercise, etc. But what effect does your personality have on your longevity? Do some kinds of personalities lead to longer lives? A new study in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society looked at this question by examining the personality characteristics of 246 children of people who had lived to be at least 100.

    The study shows that those living the longest are more outgoing, more active and less neurotic（神经质的）than other people. Long-living women are also more likely to be sympathetic and cooperative than women with a normal life span. These findings are in agreement with what you would expect from the evolutionary theory: those who like to make friends and help others can gather enough resources to make it through tough times.

    Interestingly, however, other characteristics that you might consider advantageous had no impact on whether study participants were likely to live longer. Those who were more self-disciplined, for instance, were no more likely to live to be very old. Also, being open to new ideas had no relationship to long life, which might explain all those bad-tempered old people who are fixed in their ways.

    Whether you can successfully change your personality as an adult is the subject of a longstanding psychological debate. But the new paper suggests that if you want long life, you should strive to be as outgoing as possible.

    Unfortunately, another recent study shows that your mother's personality may also help determine your longevity. That study looked at nearly 28,000 Norwegian mothers and found that those moms who were more anxious, depressed and angry were more likely to feed their kids unhealthy diets. Patterns of childhood eating can be hard to break when we're adults, which may mean that kids of depressed moms end up dying younger.

    Personality isn't destiny, and everyone knows that individuals can learn to change. But both studies show that long life isn't just a matter of your physical health but of your mental health.

    The values of artistic works, according to cultural relativism(相对主义), are simply reflections of local social and economic conditions. Such a view, however, fails to explain the ability of some works of art to excite the human mind across cultures and through centuries.

    History has witnessed the endless productions of Shakespearean plays in every major language of the world. It is never rare to find that Mozart packs Japanese concert halls, as Japanese painter Hiroshige does Paris galleries, Unique works of this kind are different from today's popular art, even if they began as works of popular art. They have set themselves apart in their timeless appeal and will probably be enjoyed for centuries into the future.

    In a 1757 essay, the philosopher David Hume argued that because" the general principles of taste are uniform(不变的) in human nature," the value of some works of art might be essentially permanent. He observed that Homer was still admired after two thousand years. Works of this type, he believed, spoke to deep and unvarying features of human nature and could continue to exist over centuries.

    Now researchers are applying scientific methods to the study of the universality of art. For example, evolutionary psychology is being used by literary scholars to explain the long-lasting themes and plot devices in fiction. The structures of musical pieces are now open to experimental analysis as never before. Research findings seem to indicate that the creation by a great artist is as permanent an achievement as the discovery by a great scientist.

    More than 20 years ago, a skeleton called Little Foot turned up in a South African cave. The nearly complete skeleton was a member of the human family. Now researchers have freed most of the skeleton from its stony shell and analyzed the fossils (化石) and they say 3.67-million-years-old Little Foot belonged to a unique species.

    Researcher Ronald Clarke and his colleagues think Little Foot belonged to A. Prometheus (普罗米修斯南猿). Clarke works at the university of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg South Africa. He studies fossilized humans and our relatives. Their foundings, published in four papers, have suggested the species A.Prometheus might have existed. Clarke has believed in that species for more than a decade, he found the first Little Foot's remains in a storage box of fossils in 1994. People began digging out the rest of the skeleton in 1997.

    Many other researchers instead argue that Little Foot likely belonged to a different species, which is known as A.africanus (南方古猿非洲种). Researcher Raymond Dart first identified A.africanus in 1924. He was studying the skull (头颅骨) of an ancient youngster called the Taung Child. Since then, people have turned up hundreds more A. africanus fossils in South African caves. Those include Sterkfontein, where Little Foot was found.

    The braincase is the part of the skull that holds the brain. And researchers found a partial braincase that Dart thought belonged to a different species in Makapansgat, one of those other caves. In 1948, Dart called this other species A. Prometheus, but he changed his mind after 1955. Instead, he said that braincase and another fossil at Makapansgat belonged to A.africanus. There was no A. Prometheus after all, he concluded.

    Clarke and his colleagues want to bring back the rejected species. They say Little Foot's distinctive skeleton, an adult female that is at least 90 percent complete, is solid evidence for it.

Steven Stein likes to follow garbage trucks. His strange habit makes sense when you consider that he's an environmental scientist who studies how to reduce litter, including things that fall off garbage trucks as they drive down the road. What is even more interesting is that one of Stein's jobs is defending an industry behind the plastic shopping bags.

Americans use more than 100 billion thin film plastic bags every year. So many end up in tree branches or along highways that a growing number of cities do not allow them at checkouts(收银台). The bags are prohibited in some 90 cities in California, including Los Angeles. Eyeing these headwinds, plastic-bag makers are hiring scientists like Stein to make the case that their products are not as bad for the planet as most people assume.

Among the bag makers' argument: many cities with bans still allow shoppers to purchase paper bags, which are easily recycled but require more energy to produce and transport. And while plastic bags may be ugly to look at, they represent a small percentage of all garbage on the ground today.

The industry has also taken aim at the product that has appeared as its replacement: reusable shopping bags. The stronger a reusable bag is, the longer its life and the more plastic-bag use it cancels out. However, longer-lasting reusable bags often require more energy to make. One study found that a cotton bag must be used at least 131 times to be better for the planet than plastic.

Environmentalists don't dispute (质疑) these points. They hope paper bags will be banned someday too and want shoppers to use the same reusable bags for years.